There have been many studies which show that circumcision is healthier for human males than the normal birth version.
Still, many people consider this operation unsafe, and unwise.
After all, why mess around with nature, we are what we are for a reason, and this species has evolved to serve its niche.
Of course, too there are issues concerning the use of clothing, which didn't exist in the early development of the species.
Now then, an interesting debating point along this topic for those who are trying to make the decision of whether or not to circumcise their young male off springs might be not only the reality that you are messing around nature, but that there are actually bona fide research studies proving that this operation prevents disease, and problems down the road.
If so, how come evolution didn't take care of that already? It may also be that with clothing there is no sunlight helping to kill the bacteria.
Many species have completely retractable penis organs, much like the landing gear on an aircraft.
If it is truly beneficial in all regards to have circumcision, then how come that extra skin exists in first place? Shouldn't it have disappeared long ago? With clothing everything is protected, but without clothing the extra sheath of skin is nature's way of doing the protection, but if it is only protecting against branches and twigs from scratching or ripping the skin, and not from bacteria forming in between the sheath and the organ, then something seems to be missing, this problem should have already been solved through the evolutionary process Additionally, and evolutionarily speaking I suppose, given enough time that might change too, but now with cures and drugs, fewer people are dying of things so, maybe that evolutionary fix may never actually come to pass? It's probably a genetic throw back like the tail-bone, and other anatomy issues which just don't jive with our carbon based biped human primate species today? Why do I even bring up this topic? Well, there's been a lot of information in the news lately, some of it from the scientific news, and other stories from various groups which decry the robbing of males of their natural condition.
In fact, one city is considering banning the operation, much the same as the United Nations is asking that female circumcision be banned globally.
In the case of females, later in life there are complications, and it can cause excruciating painful during intercourse - so obviously that's not good.
The same is not true for males, although it has been also reported, not by science, but by individuals, that there is less of a pleasurable experience without the extra skin.
Apparently, this debate will continue for quite some time.
Indeed I hope you will please consider all this and think on it.